Unpublished Disposition, 879 F.2d 865 (9th Cir. 1987)

Annotate this Case
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - 879 F.2d 865 (9th Cir. 1987)

Howard L. BASHOR, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.Henry RISLEY; Robert Cuttler; Robert Morani; WarrenWagner; and Nick Rotering, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 87-4459.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted*  June 29, 1989.Decided July 5, 1989.

Before FARRIS, NOONAN and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.


MEMORANDUM** 

Howard L. Bashor appeals a decision granting summary judgment on his claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. At the time of the events complained of, Bashor was incarcerated in the maximum security unit of the Montana State Penitentiary. He argues that Montana prison officials unreasonably denied him access to trial transcripts and other legal materials necessary to prosecute a habeas corpus action, in violation of the first and fourteenth amendments to the constitution.

We are barred from reaching the merits of Bashor's claims because he did not file a timely notice of appeal. Under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a), notice of appeal from a judgment in a civil action must be filed within 30 days after entry of the judgment. "The 30-day time limit of Rule 4(a) is mandatory and jurisdictional." Pettibone v. Cupp, 666 F.2d 333, 334 (9th Cir. 1981). Bashor's notice of appeal was filed on December 21, 1987--over 30 days after the trial court's entry of the judgment on November 18, 1987. Because he did not appeal within 30 days, or file a motion for an extension within an additional 30 days, see Fed. R. App. P. 4(a) (5), we lack jurisdiction. There is no exception based on the fact that Bashor was a prisoner proceeding pro se. Id.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

 *

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for submission without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir.R. 34-4

 **

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.